Discussion: Mission Board - Undefined Issues

It has been a while since I have been here due to a busy time in my non-online life, hi again:)

I see some things that are a little unsure/undefined about the “Mission Board”. I think the best way to explain it is to say how I interpret the situation currently and see if people agree. If we don’t agree then we need to clarify rules through a HIP.

  • All other board members than @Justin (who was elected) will have their mandate expire on June 5th 2022 - one year to the date of the passing of HIP-7.
  • There are really two boards, one for the PoH DAO and one for the UBI DAO, since the split occurred after the institution of the board. Currently, the two boards are simply occupied by the same people. Separate elections should be held for the two boards.

Do you guys agree with this interpretation?


Mads, glad to see you! I agree with this interpretation.

I’ve posted your thread on the Telegram group we are using for Governance discussions: Telegram: Contact @PoHGov.

Hi, Mads, welcome back. I agree with your interpretation.

One thing we coukd further define is if a person could be candidate for mission board of the two DAOs simultaneously, especially because during the current term, some of the mission board members were already overwhelmed with tasks of one DAO (some of them even admitted not having enough time for board duty).

I think it’s logical that each DAO elects its own board moving forward. Unsure how we can enforce on each having different people, but probably that’s a political choice that should be subject to the campaigning and debate prior to any electoral process.

1 Like

On this same line, are there any definitions on the timeline of when the process of electing new board members should start?

Since we seem to agree that board members are elected until June 5th, 2022, maybe we need to start working on some HIPs for the election process with enought time for that process to happen before the date, so that when we reach June 5th, making the change is just a matter giving access.


This makes plenty of sense.

I agree with @santisiri that we should not formally require members of the board to be distinct. Why should PoH/UBI board be mutually exclusive when they don’t have that clause with any other organizations in the world?
It may be a good norm, but not a rule.

Yes, we definitely need rules for the elections.